[nxtyear]

yeah he is a great player, and like u said, much better than moneymakr
he knows how to play aggressively and plays shit hands quite often and actually wins.

somehow i feel though there's lots of luck factors involved.
in the tournament of champions, i think he was playing recklessly not because he already won.
but because he won, he thinks he can do it again no matter what.

in some way i think he's a bit arrogant. great accomplishment this year though

he is obviously good to make it so far in a 5000 field
winning 2500 and going very high 5000, he's just as good as Dan harrington i must say!

he was chipleading alot of the time.

i fail to take a stand when it comes to deciding greg raymer.
i hate to say he's good, but he is.... in some ways

[mikie_113]

I'm going ot have to agree with you completely, Chris money maker didnt deserve it as much as Raymer. The guy is one of the classiest players in poker if you ask me. I was rooting for him all the way and am glad eh took it down before.

Originally Posted by Phoenix29

I think Greg Raymer is very well deserving of that bracelet he got in 2004 unlike Chris Moneymaker, who i still think is a fluke.

He played very well throughout the whole tourney and handled himself with class the whole time.

Altho, i was rooting for Dan Harrington to win actually coz of what hes accomplished.
3 final tables in 3 different decades, wow.

The only thing about Greg Raymer that bothered me was the Tournament of Champions.
He actually had a real good shot of winning that and yet he played so careless, like his mindset was "Well, i already won $5 million, its not like i need more".

But he almost got to the final table again this year, very very impressive.

[thesnowman22]

Phil H and Josh A could take lessons from him on how to carry yourself, though unless he changes his eating habits, he aint gonna be around for the 2020 WSOP.